Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

3.15 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS EVALUATION

This section evaluates the potential for the Build Alternative in combination with 

other past, present and future reasonably foreseeable projects to result in or 

contribute to cumulative environmental effects. A cumulative impact includes the 

total effect on a natural resource, ecosystem, or human community that is 

attributable to past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future activities/actions of 

federal, nonfederal, public, or private entities. Cumulative impacts may also include 

the effects of natural processes and events, depending on the specific resource in 

question. Cumulative impacts include the total of all impacts on a particular 

resource that have occurred, are occurring, and will likely occur as a result of any 

action or influence, including the direct and indirect effects of a federal activity. 

Accordingly, there may be different levels of cumulative impacts on different 

environmental resources. 

3.15.1 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS

Federal

Under NEPA, a cumulative impact on the environment results from the incremental 

impact of an action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

future actions, regardless of what agency (federal or nonfederal) or person 

undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts may result from individually 

minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time. 

State

Under CEQA, cumulative impacts are defined as two or more individual effects, 

which, when considered together, are considerable or that compound or increase 

other environmental impacts. The cumulative impact from several projects is the 

change in the environment that results from the incremental impact of the project 

when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but 

collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time. (CEQA Guidelines 

Section 15355) 

Consistent with Section 15130(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the discussion of 

cumulative impacts in this program-level EIR/EIS focuses on significant and 

potentially significant cumulative impacts. Per Section15130(b) of the CEQA

Guidelines:
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-2

the discussion of cumulative impacts shall reflect the severity of the impacts and 

their likelihood of occurrence, but the discussion need not provide as great a detail 

as provided for the effects attributable to the project alone. The discussion should 

be guided by the standards of practicality and reasonableness, and should focus on 

the cumulative impact to which the identified other projects contribute rather than 

the attributes of other projects which do not contribute to the cumulative impact.

A project’s contribution to a cumulative impact may be considered less than 

significant if it is implementing a plan or program designed to avoid the cumulative 

impact1or if it will implement or fund its fair share of a mitigation measure designed 

to alleviate the cumulative impact.

2

3.15.2 METHODS OF EVALUATION

The cumulative analysis describes the potential for the alternatives, in combination 

with related past, present and future projects, to result in cumulatively adverse 

environmental effects. Each analysis considers the area of cumulative analysis and 

identifies the relevant past, present, and future related to the potential cumulative 

impact. The evaluation identified whether the cumulative impact would be 

substantial and whether the contribution from a project alternative to a substantial 

cumulative impact would be considerable. 

Present and Foreseeable Actions and Projects 

Considered in the Cumulative Analysis

Between Salinas and San Luis Obispo, the areas of the Coast Corridor and US 101 

have served as important north-south routes for people and vehicles for more than 

two centuries. The relatively narrow and flat Salinas Valley facilitated the growth of 

El Camino Real dating back to the Mission Period in the late 18th century. Much of 

this historic route is now incorporated into either US 101 or nearby adjacent streets. 

The Coast Corridor railroad is located in generally close proximity to US 101 for 

much of its length, particularly between Salinas and Soledad. Railroads have 

operated along most of the Salinas Valley since the late 19th century. A continuous 

rail route from San Francisco to Los Angeles was completed just before the turn of 

the 20th century.3

This cumulative impacts discussion takes into account this past history, the 

proposed action, and other reasonably foreseeable future actions and projects. 

 

1

CEQA Guidelines Section 15064[h]

2

CEQA Guidelines Section 15130[a]

3

Ryan and Breschini, 2010
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

Given the programmatic nature of this analysis, the future foreseeable actions have 

been drawn from two main categories - land development and transportation 

projects. 

Land development projects are likely to occur in and near the communities along 

the railroad. For the purposes of evaluating land development in the corridor 

between Salinas and San Luis Obispo, this analysis draws on the environmental 

reviews of the respective county General Plans (Monterey and San Luis Obispo) and, 

where more fine-grained analysis is appropriate, environmental reviews of locally 

adopted plans. 

In addition, this analysis takes into account planned and programmed 

transportation improvement projects in the vicinity of the existing Coast Corridor 

rail alignment, US 101, and major local roadways. Therefore, proposed projects 

near US 101 are relevant to assess cumulative impacts for this program-level 

environmental document. These projects were obtained by review of federal and 

regional transportation improvement plans for Monterey and San Luis Obispo 

Counties. 

Table 3.15-1 below summarizes the list of nearby transportation projects assessed 

in this cumulative analysis.
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-4

Table 3.15-1 Planned and Programmed Transportation Improvements, Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties

ID Number Project Title Project Description Project Location

Related Regional Projects

California High-Speed Rail Construct a high-speed rail system running from San 

Francisco to Los Angeles/Anaheim via the Central 

Valley, and later to Sacramento and San Diego

San Francisco/Sacramento to Los 

Angeles/San Diego

Phillips 66 Company Rail Spur 

Extension (Phillips 66) Project

Philips 66 proposes to modify the existing rail spur 

currently on the southwest side of the Santa Maria 

Refinery (SMR). The proposal would add up to 5 

weekly trains that would likely from Utah, North 

Dakota, and/or Canada (based on market economics 

and other factors), entering the Coast Corridor 

somewhere from the north (likely Gilroy) and then 

arriving at the SMR. 

Nipomo (San Luis Obispo County)

Monterey County

CT014 US 101 - Airport Blvd. I/C East Reconstruct interchange on the eastern portion of US 

101/Airport Boulevard

US 101 at Airport Boulevard in 

Salinas

CT017 US 101 Improvements through 

Salinas 

Analyze Salinas General Plan buildout traffic along the 

US 101 corridor through Salinas, determine mainline 

improvements to address long term needs and 

construct improvements.

Between Russell/Espinosa Road 

and Harris Road in Salinas

CT018 US 101 - Harris Road/Eastside 

Connector 

Construct new Interchange on US 101 at Harris Road 

and construct 4 lane connector between Harris Road 

and Williams Road.

From US 101 at Harris Road to 

Williams Road in Salinas.

CT019 US 101 - South County Frontage 

Roads

Construct Frontage Roads from Harris Road to Chualar, 

then to Soledad

US 101 between Harris 

Road/Abbott Street (Salinas) and 

Soledad
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

ID Number Project Title Project Description Project Location

GON008 Alta Street Widen and reconstruct roadway From Gonzales city limits to US 101 

interchange – approx. 2 miles

GON012 US 101 5th St Bridge Widening Widen 5th Street over US 101 US 101 at 5th Street, Gonzales

GON013 US 101/Gloria Road Interchange Reconstruct US 101/Gloria Rd Interchange US 101 at Gloria Rd., Gonzales

GRN019 US 101 – Walnut Avenue 

Interchange 

Relocate and replace existing US 101/Walnut Avenue

Interchange

US 101 at Walnut Avenue, 

Greenfield

GRN023 Pine Avenue Overcrossing at 101 Construct new bridge over US 101 to improve E-W 

traffic flow

US 101 at Pine Avenue, Greenfield

KCY013 US 101 – First street interchange Extend San Antonio over railroad tracks from lone oak 

to US 101/First street interchange

King City

SNS045 Airport Boulevard Improvements Widen Airport Blvd. from Elks Lodge to US 101 and 

extend bike lanes

Airport Blvd. from Elks Lodge to US 

101, Salinas

SNS084 Salinas Intermodal Transportation 

Center Station Improvements

Upgrades to passenger service terminal and freight 

buildings

Salinas train station

SOL023 US 101 North Soledad 

Interchange 

Modify North Soledad interchange on US 101 and 

construct ramp improvements

US 101 and Front Street (Moranda 

Road), Soledad

SOL024 US 101 South Interchange Modify South Soledad interchange on US 101 and 

construct ramp improvements

US 101 and Front Street (Santa 

Lucia Drive) , Soledad

SOL025 US 101 – Camphoria Interchange Install new interchange at Camphoria-Gloria Road US 101 and Camphoria Gloria 

Road, Soledad

SOL026 SR 146- Bypass to US 101 Construct a new road from SR 146/Metz Road at City 

Limits to Los Coches Drive, to South US 101 

interchange

City of Soledad
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-6

ID Number Project Title Project Description Project Location

SOL036 Camphoria Gloria Road Construct to 4 lanes From US 101 to Orchard Lane 

Extension, Soledad

SOL044 Frontage Road Construct to 4 lanes From Front Street to Camphoria

Gloria Road, Soledad

TAM018 Rail Capital Improvements Includes station, platform, rail yard, track and parking 

improvements for the rail extension to Salinas project

Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, and 

Monterey Counties

TAM007 Rail Operations Operating costs to run two round trips per day 

between Gilroy and Salinas

Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Benito, 

and Monterey Counties

San Luis Obispo County

22300000243 Cuesta Grade to Santa Margarita 

Median Barrier 

In SLO County, collision reduction project to install 

concrete median barrier and improve the intersection 

at Tassajara Creek Road to improve traffic safety and 

reduce cross median collisions.

US 101

22300000297 North Cuesta Grade Wildlife 

Fencing Project

On Route 101 From 0.1 mile south of the Cuesta Grade 

0verhead to 1.5 miles north of the Santa Margarita 

Creek Bridge and on Highway 58 from the Route 

101/58 Separation to 0.9 miles east of the Route 

101/58 Separation, to install black vinyl clad chain link 

fencing for routing of wildlife to safe under highway 

culvert crossings for enhancing wildlife connectivity 

and reduce collisions.

US 101

22300000302 Paso Robles Median Barrier Near Paso Robles, from South Paso Robles Overhead to 

Route 46; construct concrete median barrier. 

US 101

22300000303 Cuesta Grade North Retaining 

Wall

Near San Luis Obispo, from 3.4 to 3.7 miles south of 

Route 58; construct retaining wall. US 101
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

ID Number Project Title Project Description Project Location

22300000331 101 Pavement Rehabilitation near 

Atascadero

In San Luis Obispo County, near Atascadero, 

rehabilitate 18.4 lane miles of pavement, dig out and 

repair areas of failure, seal cracks larger than 0.02 ft, 

and overlay existing pavement with 0.20 ft 

conventional Asphalt Concrete (AC) along US 101 from 

north of Traffic Way UC to Vineyard Drive OC.

US 101

22300000340 North County Shoulder 

Improvements 

Remove and replace shoulders from San Marcos Creek 

Bridge to San Luis Obispo/Monterey County lines. US 101

22300000342 North Paso Robles Rehab 

In San Luis Obispo county, in and near San Miguel, 

from San Marcos Creek Bridge to the Monterey County 

line, also in Monterey County (PM 0 - 1.9); pavement 

rehabilitation.

US 101

22300000438

US 101 Collision Reduction at 

Various Locations

In and near the city of San Luis Obispo, from Santa 

Maria River Bridge to Cuesta overhead at various 

locations; construct roadside paving, access gates, 

weed barriers and relocate facilities. US 101

22300000439

US 101 Collision Reduction at 

Various Locations (North County)

In and near Atascadero, from Cuesta overhead to 

South Camp Roberts overhead, at various locations, 

construct roadside paving, access gates, weed barriers 

and relocate facilities. US 101

22300000440 US 101 Roadway Preservation 

In the city of San Luis Obispo, from San Luis Obispo 

Creek Bridge to 0.3 miles south of Santa Fe Bridge 

undercrossing, rehabilitate pavement. US 101

22300000443

Tassajara Median Barrier 

Landscape Mitigation 

In SLO County near Santa Margarita from 0.8 miles 

south to 0.7 miles north of Tassajara creek road; 

landscape mitigation. US 101
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-8

ID Number Project Title Project Description Project Location

22300000522

US 101 Highway Planting 

Rehabilitation 

In SLO County, replace irrigation pressure and lateral 

supply lines, repair booster pump and motor covers 

and install appropriate replacement plantings on Route 

101 at various locations from 0.2 mile south of Tefft 

Street Overcrossing to 0.2 mile north of Avila Road 

Overcrossing. US 101

22300000523

US101/SR58 Off ramp 

reconfiguration 

In SLO County, near Santa Margarita, reconfigure 

Route 101 southbound off-ramp to Route 58 to abate 

illegal left-turn movements at Route 101 southbound 

off-ramp terminus. US 101

Sources: Transportation Agency for Monterey County, 2010; SLOCOG, 2013
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

3.15-9

3.15.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS

The cumulative impacts analysis follows the same order of environmental topics as 

Chapter 3.0, Affected Environment. 

The No Build Alternative is mentioned only when there are potential cumulative 

impacts that could result from not proceeding with the Build Alternative. Where 

the No Build Alternative would not result in impacts by 2020, or where the existing 

conditions would not change (or future conditions were considered too speculative 

to predict), the No Build Alternative is not addressed.

Traffic and Travel

Area of Cumulative Analysis: The area of cumulative analysis for effects related to 

traffic and travel include the US 101 corridor, the existing Coast Corridor railroad,

roadways around existing and proposed train stations, and other major roadways 

between San Luis Obispo and Salinas. 

Summary of Build Alternative Impacts: The Build Alternative traffic and travel

analysis determined that construction of many of the proposed physical 

improvements would have potential to temporarily disrupt freight and passenger 

rail; but such effects would be temporary. Based on the analysis included in the 

SDP, the railroad between Salinas and San Luis Obispo can accommodate projected 

future levels of both freight and passenger traffic without significant disruption of 

on-time service. 

Automobile traffic is anticipated to increase with the introduction of proposed Coast 

Daylight passenger rail service near existing passenger stations in Salinas, Paso 

Robles, and San Luis Obispo, and at proposed stations in Soledad and King City, but 

increased rail ridership could slightly reduce automobile traffic on US 101. 

Present and Future Projects: Present and future projects that could affect traffic 

and travel include transportation and land development projects in Monterey and 

San Luis Obispo counties, including the Phillips 66 Project.

Cumulative Effects: The Build Alternative, when combined with other 

transportation and land use development projects, may result in increased traffic 

levels near existing and proposed station areas that could worsen level of service at 

key intersections and thus cumulatively affect traffic in these locations. 

In particular, the City of Soledad identified cumulative traffic impacts regarding new 

traffic in the downtown area as part of its Downtown Master Plan. This cumulative 

impact was based on the entire program of land development, one component of 
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-10

which was a rail passenger station and passenger train service identical to those 

elements of the Build Alternative considered here. The Build Alternative would not 

result in any new, not previously disclosed cumulative impact in the Soledad station 

area. However, buildout of the Downtown Master Plan (including the new 

passenger station and additional service) would result in a cumulative traffic impact 

Other transportation projects in the vicinity entail operational- and safety-related 

improvements to US 101 and other major roadways. While construction may 

include impacts such as temporary detours and lane closures, most of the 

construction work would occur within or immediately adjacent to the roadway. 

Once these improvements are implemented, they would be consistent with existing 

roadway use. Therefore, the Build Alternative combined with other transportation 

projects in the Central Coast region, would not cumulatively affect traffic or travel in 

the study area.

Phillips 66 proposes to modify the existing rail spur at the SMR to allow up to five 

weekly trains delivering crude oil. It is expected that the majority of the trains 

would travel south on the Coast Corridor to the SMR, likely entering the corridor at 

San Jose. All but one existing siding (Templeton) are of sufficient length to 

accommodate the proposed Phillips 66 trains. A draft EIR for the Phillips 66 project 

did not identify any substantial impacts to on-time train performance and did not 

identify any need for any new physical rail facilities necessary in the Salinas to San 

Luis Obispo area. The additional freight traffic associated with the Phillips 66 

proposal is consistent with anticipated long-term increases in freight traffic as 

considered in the Coast Corridor SDP. Given that the Build Alternative would 

improve elements of the existing rail infrastructure, and would likely create and 

increase the length of multiple sidings, potentially including the Templeton Siding, 

the Build Alternative combined with the Phillips 66 Project and other potential 

increases in freight rail using the corridor, would not result in a cumulative impact.

Recommended mitigation and avoidance strategies outlined in Section 3.1, Traffic 

and Travel of this program-level EIS/EIR would be incorporated in future 

development of any particular component of the Build Alternative to lessen any 

traffic or travel impacts. Similarly, the construction and operation of anticipated 

transportation and land development projects would likely be required to abide by 

similar environmental review processes as the Build Alternative and would thus be 

expected to incorporate similar mitigation measures regarding traffic and travel. 

Therefore, the Build Alternative would not contribute considerably to any 

cumulative impact related to traffic/transportation. 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

3.15-11

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Area of Cumulative Analysis: The area of cumulative analysis for effects related to 

air quality and greenhouse gas emissions includes the North Central Coast and San 

Luis Obispo County Air Basins.

Summary of Build Alternative Impacts: The Build Alternative would potentially 

result in new air quality and greenhouse gas emissions from construction of any or 

all of the proposed physical improvements as well as from increased train

operations (locomotive emissions). However, the Build Alternative would 

potentially offset some of these emissions over time as increased rail passenger 

ridership associated with the Coast Daylight would result in small reductions in 

regional air pollutant emissions and greenhouse gases. 

Present and Future Projects: Present and future projects that could affect air 

quality include other land development and transportation projects within the 

cumulative analysis area (the respective air basins), the construction or operation of 

which would result in increased regional emissions. 

Cumulative Effects: With regard to regional effects, neither County concluded that 

General Plan buildout would result in cumulative air quality or greenhouse gas 

emissions impacts. 

In the EIR for its Downtown Specific Plan, the City of Soledad concluded that specific 

plan buildout (which included -- but was not limited to -- the proposed passenger 

station and reinstitution of railroad passenger service) would contribute 

considerably to a cumulative adverse impact on regional air quality.

Because this previously identified cumulative impact related directly to proposed 

station area and railroad service included as part of the Build Alternative, the Build 

Alternative would not contribute any further to this cumulative impact. 

The Build Alternative, when combined with planned and programmed

transportation improvement projects, may affect air quality and greenhouse gas 

emissions in the two counties and the larger region over time. The planned and 

programmed transportation improvements are heavily focused on capacity 

optimizations of existing roadways in the project vicinity. No widening or other 

physical expansion of US 101 is planned, although some local streets in the vicinity 

of US 101 are planned to be widened or expanded. 

Construction of these transportation improvements as well as of anticipated land 

use development projects would entail one-time, construction-period emissions of 

air pollutants and greenhouse gases. Project-specific environmental reviews of 

these improvements would likely incorporate conditions of approval and/or 
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-12

mitigation measures intended to limit construction-related emissions. Therefore, 

there would not likely be a cumulative impact related to construction emissions. 

Operations of improved roadways could result in an increase in vehicle miles 

traveled (VMT) and related increases in vehicle emissions. 

The Build Alternative presents some small potential reductions in emissions of air 

pollutants and greenhouse gases through a small expected mode shift from 

automobile to passenger rail. Passenger rail has considerably lower greenhouse gas 

emissions per passenger mile than other modes, including aircraft, passenger cars 

and light-duty trucks. 

Recommended mitigation and avoidance strategies outlined in Section 3.2, Air 

Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, would likely be incorporated in future 

design and environmental analysis of particular components of the Build Alternative 

to lessen any impacts on air quality and greenhouse gas emissions.

Similarly, the construction and operation of anticipated transportation and land 

development projects would likely be required to abide by similar environmental 

review processes as the Build Alternative and would thus be expected to 

incorporate similar mitigation measures regarding air quality and greenhouse gas 

emissions.

Therefore, the Build Alternative would not contribute considerably to any 

cumulative impact related to air quality or greenhouse gas emissions. 

Noise and Vibration

Area of Cumulative Analysis: The area for cumulative analysis includes 

approximately a 1⁄4-mile radius from the Build Alternative. This area is based on the 

extent to which potentially significant noise and vibration can travel from the 

existing railroad and proposed improvements. 

Summary of Build Alternative Impacts: Roadways and railways are major 

contributors to ambient noise and vibration levels. Generally, noise will continue to 

grow as population increases and use of highways and railroads increases. The 

Coast Corridor study area travels through many agricultural areas with low 

population density as well as urban and developed areas. The Build Alternative 

would increase noise and vibration levels to sensitive receptors in these areas, 

owing to expanded passenger rail service and physical improvements, particularly 

when trains sound their horns, travel at faster speeds, or where the tracks are 

realigned closer to residential areas. 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

3.15-13

Present and Future Projects: Present and future projects that have noise and 

vibration impacts include other land development and transportation projects 

within the cumulative analysis area, where the construction or operation of which 

would result in increased noise and vibration.

Cumulative Effects: A substantial portion of the railroad alignment between Salinas 

and San Luis Obispo is within 1⁄4 mile of US 101, so rail and traffic noise can combine 

to result in cumulative effects. 

Similar to the Build Alternative as a whole, proposed transportation improvements 

and planned land development projects would be phased in over time. 

Construction noise associated with any Build Alternative components selected for 

implementation along with noise associated with the construction of transportation 

improvements and land development projects would thus be unlikely to combine 

into cumulatively significant impacts. 

In terms of operational impacts, the proposed transportation improvements would 

likely facilitate higher traffic volumes and would thus result in higher noise levels at 

locations in close proximity to US 101. Where these improvements are in close 

proximity to both the railroad/proposed improvements and sensitive receptors, 

there is the potential for railroad and highway noise to combine into a cumulatively 

significant impact. 

The Build Alternative’s contribution would be the noise associated with passing 

trains - 2 per day in the opening year and up to 4 per day in the horizon year of 

2040. From any point along the railroad, train passings would be relatively short 

duration events - about 1 minute per train, or up to 4 minutes per day. In contrast, 

roadway transportation noises increases would likely occur for much longer 

durations - potentially several hours. Given the short duration of passing trains and 

associated noise, the Build Alternative’s contribution would likely not be 

cumulatively considerable. 

Similarly, train activity at the existing and proposed stations would result in changes 

in the noise and vibration environment at these locations. However, trains would 

be traveling at relatively low speeds in and out of the station areas for relatively 

few, short durations and would thus be unlikely to result in any cumulatively 

significant effect. 

Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures consistent with the strategies 

outlined in Section 3.3, Noise and Vibration, would likely be incorporated in future 

development of any particular component of the Build Alternative to lessen any 

noise or vibration-related impacts. Similarly, the construction and operation of 

anticipated transportation and land development projects would likely be required 
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-14

to subject to CEQA and/or NEPA environmental review and would thus be expected 

to incorporate feasible measures to avoid or lessen any identified noise and 

vibration impacts. 

Therefore, the Build Alternative would not contribute considerably to any 

cumulative impact related to noise or vibration. 

Energy

Area of Cumulative Analysis: The area of analysis for energy cumulative effects 

includes Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties and the Central California region as 

a whole. 

Summary of Build Alternative Impacts: The Build Alternative would result in

construction energy usage for the manufacture of materials and the use of heavy 

equipment, construction worker travel to and from active work sites, and potential 

construction-related detours. The Build Alternative also includes expansion of 

passenger rail service, which will require energy resources (petroleum products) for

locomotive power. 

Present and Future Projects: Present and future projects that could have energyrelated impacts include any other development projects within the cumulative 

analysis area, where the construction or operation of which would result in the 

consumption of energy.

Cumulative Effects: The Build Alternative, along with existing and anticipated 

transportation and land development projects would result in the consumption of 

energy resources. 

Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties have planned and programmed several 

transportation improvement projects that would require energy resources for 

construction and would facilitate increased operational energy consumption 

through increased road VMT. Planned land use development projects would 

require energy resources during both construction and operation. Together, the 

Build Alternative with other transportation and land use development projects 

could constitute significant cumulative energy impacts. 

However, the Build Alternative would ultimately reduce transportation-related 

energy consumption by increasing passenger ridership and by increasing the 

efficiency of the existing railroad operations. 

Recommended mitigation and avoidance strategies outlined in Section 3.4, Energy,

would be incorporated in the design and development of any particular component 

of the Build Alternative to lessen any energy consumption impacts. Similarly, the 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

3.15-15

construction and operation of anticipated transportation and land development 

projects would likely be required to abide by similar environmental review 

processes as the Build Alternative and would thus be expected to incorporate 

similar mitigation measures.

Therefore, the Build Alternative would not contribute considerably to any 

cumulative impact related to energy usage. 

Land Use and Planning

Area of Cumulative Analysis: The area of cumulative analysis for effects related to 

land use includes Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties, particularly the 

communities in proximity to the existing railroad and the Build Alternative (including 

Salinas, Chualar, Gonzales, Soledad, Greenfield, King City, San Ardo, Bradley, San 

Miguel, Paso Robles, Atascadero, Templeton, Santa Margarita, and San Luis Obispo). 

Summary of Build Alternative Impacts: Land use patterns along the Salinas to San 

Luis Obispo portion of the railroad have been generally stable for several decades. 

Development has largely been focused within established communities. With a few 

notable exceptions, outside existing communities, lands are generally in

agricultural/viticultural use, institutional use, or open space. Construction activities 

could result in temporary land use impacts and could include road closures and 

traffic detours, which could in turn disrupt access to public facilities, emergency 

vehicle access, and pose potential physical barriers to communities and business 

districts.

All curve realignments, as well as several sidings and extensions would require 

acquisition of lands outside the existing railroad right-of-way and the conversion of 

such lands to railroad use. Acquisition of adjacent agricultural, residential, and open 

space lands would result in an incompatible land use, and could result in 

environmental justice impacts.

Present and Future Projects: Present and future projects that could affect land use 

and planning include transportation and land development projects in Monterey 

and San Luis Obispo counties.

Cumulative Effects: The Build Alternative, in combination with related 

transportation and land development projects could contribute to cumulative 

impacts related to land use, communities, property, and environmental justice. 

In terms of land use compatibility, the Build Alternative would help foster desired 

development around proposed station areas in Soledad and King City. Increased 

passenger rail service could also help reinforce the visitor-serving land uses patterns 

around existing train stations in Salinas and Paso Robles. The San Luis Obispo
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-16

station area is primarily residential in character, but also includes some visitorserving mixed-use development along Osos Street, which could be reinforced by the 

Build Alternative. Therefore, within established communities, the Build Alternative 

would have complementary and beneficial effects related to land use compatibility. 

Outside of established communities, however, curve realignments and siding 

improvements, if developed, could result in the permanent conversion of lands from 

agricultural, residential, or open space uses into transportation use. Some siding 

improvements and the bulk of other proposed improvements would be constructed 

immediately along the existing rail line or within the railroad right-of-way. 

In contrast, planned land development and transportation projects are less likely to 

result in land use conversions. Land development projects face generally welldefined urban growth boundaries and/or local limitations on the conversion of 

agricultural lands. Planned transportation improvements primarily involve 

operational enhancements that would not require substantial additional right-ofway or direct conversion of residential, commercial, or agricultural land uses to 

transportation uses. 

As the extent to which the Build Alternative might result in such conversion is 

unknown, it is assumed here that the Build Alternative could result in a cumulatively 

significant land use impact if one or more of the curve realignments is ultimately 

constructed and would convert substantial areas of residential or agricultural land 

to a transportation use. Project-level design refinements and funding availability 

would determine if any of the curve realignments would ultimately result in such 

conversion and thus whether any cumulative impact would occur. 

Similarly, property impacts are unlikely for most of the anticipated land 

development and programmed transportation improvements. Land development 

projects will generally proceed only with the consent of the property owner and 

would thus be unlikely to result in the use of private property. Programmed 

transportation projects are set to generally occur within or immediately adjacent to 

the area’s existing transportation facilities. As no major roadway expansion projects 

are included in the list of programmed improvements, the potential for substantial 

takes of private property is minimal. 

In contrast, certain components of the Build Alternative have a much greater 

potential to require property acquisition. These components include curve 

realignments and other features for which schematic plans have been developed; 

final plans could require acquisition of land outside the existing railroad right-ofway. Since the extent to which the Build Alternative might result in property 

acquisition is unknown, it is assumed the Build Alternative could result in a 

cumulatively significant property impact if one or more of the curve realignments 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

3.15-17

are deemed necessary and property acquisition proceeds accordingly. Project-level 

design refinements and funding availability will determine if any of the curve 

realignments would ultimately result in such acquisition and thus whether any 

cumulative impact would occur. 

Aesthetics and Visual Resources

Area of Cumulative Analysis: The area of cumulative analysis for effects related to 

visual resources and aesthetics includes the viewshed, or the visible environment, 

surrounding the Build Alternative study area. The Build Alternative entails about

130 miles of railroad and existing/proposed station areas, all in relative proximity to 

the US 101 corridor between Salinas and San Luis Obispo. 

Summary of Build Alternative Impacts: The visual analysis determined that 

construction and operation of some of the proposed physical improvements could 

result in visual impacts. In general, construction impacts include the temporary 

visual presence of construction equipment, light and glare impacts from any 

nighttime construction work, and disturbed natural land cover that would recover to 

its original undisturbed form once construction is complete. Operational impacts 

include physical changes to the additional passenger and freight rail cars over time, 

existing land cover, particularly where new track alignments would convert existing 

land cover in residential and open space areas to railroad use. 

The Build Alternative, in combination with related transportation and land 

development projects could contribute to cumulative visual impacts. 

Present and Future Projects: Present and future projects that could affect 

aesthetics and visual resources include transportation and land development 

projects in Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties.

Cumulative Effects: According to the Monterey County General Plan EIR, future 

growth within Monterey County would result in intensification of existing urban 

uses as well as conversion of open space into urban land uses. The General Plan EIR 

concluded that in converting of undeveloped land to urban uses, future land 

development projects would obstruct views of scenic areas and would thus result in 

a significant cumulative impact to visual character and quality in the County. 

In considering the potential of the Build Alternative to combine with land 

development and transportation projects and result in cumulative visual impacts, it 

is important to note that proposed transportation projects would have negligible 

visual impacts because such improvements would largely occur within or 

immediately adjacent to existing transportation corridors, resulting in relatively little 

overall change in visual character or quality. The Phillips 66 project could result in 
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-18

additional rail transport activity, but such activities are consistent with the visual 

context of the rail corridor and would thus be unlikely to result in 

substantial/significant visual effects. Additionally, Build Alternative improvements 

such as track and signal upgrades, new powered switches, and new sidings and 

siding extensions, would also largely occur within or adjacent to the existing railway 

right-of-way and would thus result in minimal visual effects. 

However, curve realignments would result in some conversion of agricultural, open 

space, and residential lands to rail transportation use. Such conversion could

permanently alter the visual character of affected areas. Recommended mitigation 

and avoidance strategies outlined in Section 3.6, Aesthetics and Visual Resources,

would be incorporated in the design and development of any particular component 

of the Build Alternative to lessen any visual character/quality impacts.

As the extent to which the Build Alternative might result in such conversion is 

unknown, it is assumed here that the Build Alternative could result in a cumulatively 

significant visual impact if one or more of the curve realignments is ultimately 

constructed and would convert substantial areas of residential or agricultural land 

to a transportation use. Project-level design refinements and funding availability 

would determine if any of the curve realignments would ultimately result in such 

conversion and thus whether any cumulative impact would occur. 

Similarly, the construction and operation of anticipated transportation and land 

development projects would likely be required to abide by similar environmental 

review processes as the Build Alternative and would thus be expected to 

incorporate similar mitigation measures.

Agricultural and Forest Resources

Area of Cumulative Analysis: The area considered for cumulative impacts to 

farmlands includes Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties, as described in Section 

3.7, Agricultural and Forest Resources.

Summary of Build Alternative Impacts: Many of the components of the Build 

Alternative require construction outside the existing railroad right-of-way outside 

urban areas and thus, in several locations would require the temporary use of 

farmland during construction and/or the permanent conversion of farmland. 

Summary of Present and Future Projects: Present and future projects that could 

affect agriculture and forest resources include transportation and land development 

projects in Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties, particularly those occurring 

outside of urban areas.
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

3.15-19

Cumulative Effects: According to the Monterey County General Plan EIR, buildout of 

the General Plan would cumulatively contribute to conversion of Important 

Farmland to non-agricultural uses. Some farmland conversion is also anticipated in 

San Luis Obispo County, but very little Prime Farmland conversion is expected in 

either county, owing to strong farmland protection measures each county has 

adopted.

Proposed transportation improvements would largely take place within the 

footprint of US 101 or other adjacent roadways in the region and would therefore 

be unlikely to combine with the Build Alternative to result in any significant 

cumulative effect to agricultural or forest lands. Furthermore, Build Alternative 

improvements such as track and signal upgrades, new powered switches, sidings 

and siding extensions, etc. would also largely occur within or adjacent to the existing 

railway right-of-way and would have little effect to agricultural land. 

Curve realignments would result in conversion of agricultural lands to rail 

transportation use. Such conversion would permanently alter the affected areas 

and could contribute to agricultural conversion effects associated with other land 

development projects in the region. As the extent to which the Build Alternative 

might result in such conversion is unknown, it is assumed here that the Build 

Alternative could result in a cumulatively significant impact on farmlands if one or 

more of the curve realignments is ultimately constructed and would convert 

substantial areas of agricultural land to a transportation use. Project-level design 

refinements and funding availability would determine if any of the curve 

realignments would ultimately result in such conversion and thus whether any 

cumulative impact would occur. 

Recommended mitigation and avoidance strategies outlined in Section 3.7, 

Agricultural and Forest Resources, would be incorporated in the design and 

development of any particular component of the Build Alternative to lessen any 

farmland related impacts. However, loss of Prime Farmland impacts cannot be 

mitigated to a less-than-significant level even though conservation easements and 

other measures may lessen such impacts. 

Public Utilities and Services

Area of Cumulative Analysis: The area considered for cumulative effects to utilities 

and public services correspond to the service areas of the particular utility and 

public service (police and fire) providers.

Natural gas providers PG&E and SCE respectively serve substantial portions of 

northern and southern California. Electricity is provided by PG&E, whose service 

area extends from Shasta County to Santa Barbara County. Water and wastewater 
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-20

services are provided by a combination of local special districts and private 

companies whose service areas extend well beyond the immediate boundaries of 

the project study area. Police and fire services are provided either by County 

agencies, whose jurisdiction spans the entirety of the affected counties, or by local 

agencies, who serve incorporated communities along the project corridor.

Summary of Build Alternative Impacts: 

Utility conflicts: Proposed new and/or extended sidings, along with the proposed 

second mainline, have the potential to conflict with existing utility transmission 

facilities in and around the existing railroad right-of-way. 

Utility usage: Some components of the Build Alternative would require connections 

to public utilities such as water, electricity, and natural gas. Proposed new stations 

would likely be the most utility intensive Build Alternative components; powered 

switches and signaling mechanisms would also require electricity. 

Public service demand generation: The vast majority of physical improvements 

comprising the Build Alternative, such as railroad sidings/extensions or curve 

realignments, would have a neutral effect on increasing demand for public services 

like fire and police. In contrast, proposed new stations could require increased 

police and fire services; increased ridership at existing stations could also increase 

demands for public services. 

Present and future projects that could affect utilities and public services include 

transportation and land development projects not only in Monterey and San Luis 

Obispo counties, but potentially points well beyond when considering gas and 

electric providers, which operate across multiple regions in the state.

Present and Future Projects: Present and future projects that could affect public 

utilities and services include transportation and land development projects in 

Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties.

Cumulative Effects: In terms of utility conflicts, the components of the Build 

Alternative that would require construction of new linear facilities either inside or 

outside the railroad right-of-way may conflict with existing pipelines, electrical 

transmission lines, communication facilities, or other linear utilities. The severity of 

such impacts can usually be lessened substantially through a combination of careful 

design, avoidance, and/or protection-in-place policies, as called for in the mitigation 

strategies discussion presented herein. Similarly, future transportation projects may 

require construction/grading in or near existing transportation facilities like US 101, 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

3.15-21

where similar utility conveyances can be found. As it is reasonable to expect that 

other projects would be subject to similar mitigation to avoid or minimize any utility 

conflicts, there would be no cumulatively significant impact regarding utility 

conflicts. 

Regarding electric and gas utilities, the Build Alternative would, in combination with 

planned/anticipated land development in the Central Coast region, result in 

additional demand for electricity and natural gas. The Build Alternative would 

require such utilities primarily at proposed stations and electric power specifically 

for signal upgrades and switching equipment. Similarly, demand for water and 

wastewater services would increase as a result of planned land development plus 

the Build Alternative.

Demand for police and fire services would likely increase from both planned 

transportation and land development projects. Proposed transportation 

enhancements would facilitate additional vehicle travel on US 101 and adjacent 

roadways, thus increasing demand for emergency response services. Additional 

railroad freight traffic as well as all types of land development called for in adopted 

local plans would similarly increase demand for emergency response. 

Individual rail improvements, such as curve realignments and the second mainline, 

have no foreseeable connection to increased demand for public services. New or 

expanded station areas could incrementally contribute to increased demands for 

public services (police response, emergency services, etc.). However, the 

anticipated increase in station area activity is modest, even in the two communities 

where new stations are planned. Neither of the environmental documents for the 

Soledad or King City station area/downtown plans indicated any significant effect to 

public services as a result of plan implementation. Anticipated increases in 

passenger activity at the Salinas and San Luis Obispo stations are not at such high 

levels that substantial public services impacts could occur. It is unlikely that 

implementation of the Build Alternative with other planned development projects 

would result in a cumulative impact to emergency services; however, future projectlevel review would include coordination with emergency service providers to ensure 

no significant impacts would occur. 

Disruption of utility services could occur as a result of potential conflicts with 

electrical transmission lines, natural gas pipelines, oil pipelines, wastewater and 

water utilities, and other utilities during construction of other roadway 

improvement projects (i.e., US 101 and local roads). However, measures would be 

taken to avoid potential conflicts in advance to the extent feasible and practical; 

therefore, few additional conflicts are expected from future transportation 

improvements. 
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-22

Recommended mitigation and avoidance strategies outlined in Section 3.8, Public 

Utilities and Services, of this program-level EIS/EIR would be incorporated in future 

development of any particular component of the Build Alternative to lessen any 

impacts on utilities and public services. Similarly, the construction and operation of 

anticipated transportation and land development projects would likely be required 

to abide by similar environmental review processes as the Build Alternative and 

would thus be expected to incorporate similar mitigation measures regarding 

utilities and public services. Therefore, the cumulative impact related to utilities 

and public service providers operating in the Central Coast region would not be 

substantial.

Hazardous Materials and Wastes

Area of Cumulative Analysis: The area of cumulative analysis considered for 

hazardous materials effects includes the areas identified within 1/8-mile radius 

around the Build Alternative study area including major roadways between Salinas 

and San Luis Obispo. 

Summary of Build Alternative Impacts: Overall, there is potential risk to uncover 

hazardous materials near roadways and agricultural areas within the entire Coast 

Corridor study area, because of the potential for aerially deposited lead and 

particulate matter deposited from vehicles (both automobiles and trains) as well as 

pesticide use along the railroad and along roadways. As a result, construction 

activities may likely encounter contaminated soil containing pesticide or herbicide 

residue, aerially deposited lead, or other soil or groundwater contaminants. 

Furthermore, database searches identified both active- and closed-status hazardous 

sites within the study area.

The Build Alternative would not result in sustained, long-term, routine 

transportation of hazardous materials. However, the Phillips 66 project proposes 

increased use of the railroad for transport of crude oil, a potentially hazardous 

substance if mishandled.

Present and future projects that would cumulatively risk exposure to hazardous 

materials or wastes include other transportation and land use development

projects. The construction of both types of projects, similar to the Build Alternative, 

would require the use of materials that could be considered hazardous if used, 

stored, or transported improperly. Such materials are strictly regulated by federal, 

state, and local laws specifically to ensure they do not result in a gradual increase in 

toxins in the environment. Both counties reinforce these regulations by requiring 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

3.15-23

that construction and operation be conducted pursuant to applicable standards and 

regulations. These are implemented as part of normal development review and 

construction permitting procedures and typically reduce project-specific impacts to 

a less-than -significant level. 

Present and Future Projects: Present and future projects that could have hazardous 

material and waste impacts include transportation and land development projects 

in Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties, as well as the Phillips 66 project. 

Cumulative Effects: Compliance with federal, state, and local regulations 

concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials and waste would 

reduce the potential for significant public health and safety impacts from hazardous 

materials to occur. Therefore, future development would not affect the number of 

people exposed to risks of hazardous materials. 

Risks of encountering a recorded hazardous waste site are location-specific and 

would not contribute to (in an additive sense) the impacts on other sites. The 

present and future projects within close proximity to the study area are generally 

geographically disperse and it is not anticipated that they would use quantities of 

hazardous materials that would combine in such a way to endanger human or 

environmental health. However, other transportation projects may encounter 

contaminated soil containing pesticide or herbicide residue, aerially deposited lead, 

or other soil or groundwater contaminants along major roadways. 

The Phillips 66 project, if approved, would add up to five weekly freight trains 

carrying crude oil through the entirety of the Salinas to San Luis Obispo corridor. 

This would be in addition to existing freight traffic that includes transport of oil from 

San Ardo south to refineries in the Los Angeles area. The Build Alternative would 

not contribute to any increase in freight rail or more specifically the transport of 

hazardous materials by rail. 

Overall, hazardous materials are regulated by state and federal laws specifically to 

ensure that they do not result in a gradual toxification of the environment. 

Recommended mitigation strategies identified in Section 3.9, Hazardous Materials

and Wastes, would lessen the adverse effects related to hazardous materials as a 

result. It is reasonable to assume that similar mitigation measures would be 

implemented as part of the present and future projects to alleviate potential 

adverse effects related to hazardous materials. Each individual project would be 

required to conduct subsequent environmental analysis to investigate and report 

any findings of contaminated soil or groundwater. Therefore, it is not anticipated 

that there would be any cumulative impact related to hazardous materials or 

wastes.
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-24

Cultural and Paleontological Resources

Area of Cumulative Analysis: The cumulative context for cultural resources are 

transportation and land use development projects in both counties that could 

potentially affect archaeological, historical, or paleontological resources. 

Summary of Build Alternative Impacts: The Build Alternative proposes 

improvements near potentially historic and archaeological sites, as well as some 

paleontological sensitive areas. 

Present and Future Projects: Present and future projects that would cumulatively 

affect cultural and/or paleontological resources include other transportation and 

land use development projects that would affect the same cultural or 

paleontological sites as the Build Alternative. 

Cumulative Effects: Both County General Plan EIRs concluded that build out

(encompassing both land development and circulation improvements) would not 

result in any significant cumulative impact to cultural resources. Cumulative 

impacts to historical and archeological resources can occur when development of an 

area results in the removal of a substantial number of historic structures or 

archeological sites that when taken in combination could degrade the physical 

historical record of an area. 

Cultural resources - both known and unknown-- are protected by a number of 

federal, state, and local regulations, reinforced by goals, policies, and mitigations 

associated with each county’s general plan as well as the planning documents of 

county transportation agencies. Furthermore, recommended mitigation and 

avoidance strategies outlined in Section 3.10, Cultural and Paleontological 

Resources of this program-level EIS/EIR would be incorporated in future 

development of any particular component of the Build Alternative to lessen any 

impacts on these resources. Similarly, the construction and operation of anticipated 

transportation and land development projects would likely be required to abide by 

similar environmental review processes as the Build Alternative and would thus be 

expected to incorporate similar mitigation measures. Therefore, there would be no 

cumulatively significant impact to cultural resources. 

Geology, Soils, and Minerals

Area of Cumulative Analysis: The area considered for cumulative effects related to 

geology and soils includes any proposed land development or transportation 

projects in the vicinity of the Build Alternative. 

Summary of Build Alternative Impacts: Geology and soils-related hazards exist 

within and near the Coast Corridor rail alignment, as well as where Build Alternative 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

3.15-25

physical improvements are proposed. These hazards include varying degrees of

surface fault rupture, ground shaking, liquefaction, corrosive and/or expansive soils,

and landslides. The Build Alternative is not expected to have any significant impacts 

related to geology and soils with the implementation of avoidance and minimization 

measures.

Present and Future Projects: As environmental effects to geology and soils are 

located in the same geologic setting, both present and future transportation and 

land development projects would be exposed to similar hazards. 

Cumulative Effects: The respective General Plan EIRs noted that future build-out 

and urbanization would result in greater exposure of persons and property to 

geologic and soil hazards, but that adherence to goals and policies, as well as County 

and local building codes and other mitigative measures, would not combine to 

result in a cumulative impact related to geology and soils. 

Cumulative geology and soils impacts could occur if a significant number of people 

and/or a significant amount of property would be exposed to any one or more 

geologic/soils hazard - landslides, seismic shaking, ground failure, and many others. 

It is unlikely that the Build Alternative in combination with projected land 

development and transportation projects would result in a cumulatively significant 

impact related to geology/soils hazards or mineral resources. This is due to the 

enactment of a number of federal, state, and local regulations, as well as several 

adopted goals, policies, and mitigations associated with local general plans that 

individually and collectively aim to reduce geology and soils related impacts on all 

land development and transportation projects. Similarly, mineral resources are 

protected at the local level. Future transportation projects are generally planned 

for existing transportation corridors and land use projects for urbanized areas; as 

such, neither type of project would be likely to result in limitation of access to 

important mineral resources. 

Recommended mitigation and avoidance strategies outlined in Section 3.11, 

Geology, Soils, and Minerals, of this program-level EIS/EIR would be incorporated in 

future development of any particular component of the Build Alternative to lessen 

any impacts on these resources. Similarly, the construction and operation of 

anticipated transportation and land development projects would likely be required 

to abide by similar environmental review processes as the Build Alternative and 

would thus be expected to incorporate similar mitigation measures. Therefore, 

there would be no cumulatively significant impact to geology, soils, or minerals. 
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-26

Hydrology and Water Resources 

Area of Cumulative Analysis: The area of cumulative analysis for hydrology

resources includes the Build Alternative study area identified plus nearby and 

related watersheds. These include the Salinas River and its tributary drainages. In 

addition, regional groundwater basins are also part of the cumulative study area. 

Summary of Build Alternative Impacts: The Build Alternative could result in 

potential impacts to surface waters through runoff during construction activities, 

operation-related pollution in areas immediately adjacent to surface waters, and 

potential surface water crossings as further described below. The Build Alternative 

would have relatively little potential to either deplete groundwater resources or to 

impede groundwater recharge. 

Present and Future Projects: Present and future projects that could contribute to 

cumulative impacts to the identified water resources within the area of cumulative 

analysis include transportation and development.

Cumulative Effects: According to the Monterey County General Plan EIR, general 

plan buildout would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative hydrological 

impacts related to the loss of area available for groundwater recharge, water quality 

deterioration, and water supply. In contrast, the EIR for the San Luis Obispo County 

Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) reduced the amount of allowable 

development from what had been previously allowed, thereby reducing potential 

impacts related to groundwater depletion and other water quality impacts. 

In evaluating whether the Build Alternative would contribute considerably to 

cumulative hydrological impacts, it is important to note that the Build Alternative 

would not directly result in any major new demand for water resources because it 

would not create any new housing units, any new maintenance facilities, nor any 

new commercial or industrial users, all of which could be substantial users of water. 

Moreover, the Build Alternative’s effects to surface waters can be avoided or 

minimized through careful design. The Build Alternative would not result in a 

substantial number of new stream crossings. Recommended mitigation and 

avoidance strategies outlined in Section 3.12,Hydrology and Water Resources, of 

this program-level EIS/EIR would be incorporated in future development of any 

particular component of the Build Alternative to lessen any impacts on these 

resources. Similarly, the construction and operation of anticipated transportation 

and land development projects would likely be required to abide by similar 

environmental review processes as the Build Alternative and would thus be 

expected to incorporate similar mitigation measures. Therefore, there would be no 

cumulatively significant impact to hydrology and water resources. 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

3.15-27

Biological Resources and Wetlands

Area of Cumulative Analysis: The area of cumulative analysis for biological 

resources includes the study area identified for the Build Alternative plus any 

immediately adjacent lands and waterways containing sensitive biological resources 

(sensitive habitats or protected plant or animal species).

Summary of Build Alternative Impacts: The biological resources and wetlands 

analysis determined that the Build Alternative would have a heightened potential to 

result in temporary or permanent impacts directly proportional to the extent to 

which components of the Build Alternative diverge substantially from the existing 

railroad right-of-way onto lands that include sensitive vegetation, special-status 

species, critical habitat for protected species, wetlands, or non-jurisdictional waters. 

For example, one of the proposed curve realignments could entail use of lands 

within a designated wildlife area (Big Sandy) along the Salinas River near Camp 

Roberts. However, if some or all of this curve realignment can be designed to avoid 

or minimize its intrusion into the wildlife area, the extent of potential impact would 

be reduced considerably. 

Present and Future Projects: Present and future projects that could contribute to 

cumulative impacts to the identified biological resources within the area of 

cumulative analysis include planned transportation and development projects.

Cumulative Effects: Neither County’s general plan EIR identified any significant 

cumulative impact related to buildout of their respective general plans. However,

the Build Alternative, in combination with other land development and 

transportation projects in the area, could result in significant threats to protected 

plant or animal species or their habitats, if significant new barriers to wildlife 

movement were created, or if substantial areas of wetlands were converted or 

otherwise compromised. 

Cumulative impacts to these resources are highly unlikely to occur in part due to a 

broad array of federal, state, and local regulations, as well as several adopted goals, 

policies, and mitigations associated with local general plans that individually and 

collectively aim to protect biological resources like these from harm, degradation, or 

other diminishment. Moreover, the Build Alternative and other transportation 

projects in the area are planned in areas that are largely previously developed -

existing roadways and railroads. Land development projects are generally 

concentrated within urbanized areas, away from both biological and agricultural 

resources. The aforementioned federal, state, and local regulations would act 

together to avoid or minimize such effects to biological resources including 

wetlands. 
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-28

Wildlife movement in the vicinity of the Build Alternative occurs within and along 

the major waterways, including the Salinas River and tributaries. The Build 

Alternative in combination with future transportation improvements would 

primarily affect existing linear facilities and not create new barriers to wildlife 

movement. Land development projects that are concentrated in urban areas would 

have the least potential to interfere with wildlife movement, however, certain types 

of projects outside urban areas (solar farms, oil and gas fields, and other large-scale 

projects) could result in new barriers to wildlife movement. A review of projects in 

planning stages in each county indicates that some such facilities are being 

proposed but at substantial distances (at least 25 miles east) from the railroad rightof-way area.4

 Furthermore, even if such large-scale developments were to result in 

a significant cumulative impact, the contribution of the Build Alternative would not 

be considerable for the reasons articulated herein, including their distance from the 

railroad right-of-way. 

As elements of the Build Alternative move forward for further design and 

construction, they would be subject to the recommended mitigation and avoidance 

strategies outlined in Section 3.13 (Biological Resources and Wetlands) of this 

EIS/EIR in the form of project-specific mitigation measures. Similarly, the 

construction and operation of anticipated transportation and land development 

projects would likely be required to abide by similar environmental review 

processes as the Build Alternative and would thus be expected to incorporate 

similar mitigation measures. Therefore, there would be no cumulatively significant 

impact to biological resources and wetlands.

Growth Inducement

Area of Cumulative Analysis: The area for cumulative analysis of growth inducing 

impacts includes all three existing stations in the study area (Salinas, Paso Robles, 

and San Luis Obispo), as well as the two proposed station areas in King City and 

Soledad. This area is centered around existing and proposed stations insofar as 

stations comprise the main potential for a passenger railroad project to directly or 

indirectly affect population, employment, or economic growth. 

 

4

In Monterey County, the proposed California Flats Solar project would create a 280 megawatt solar 

energy facility on 1,900 acres in the southeastern corner of Monterey County. This project area is 

about 25 miles northeast of Paso Robles. Additionally, a 550 megawatt solar power plant is proposed 

and a 250 megawatt solar power plant has been approved in the Carrizo Plain area of San Luis Obispo 

County. The Carrizo Plain area is separate from the Coast Corridor rail alignment by more than 50 

miles and rugged mountain terrain. 
Coast Corridor

Draft Program EIS/EIR 3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation

3.15-29

Summary of Build Alternative Impacts: The Build Alternative would have the 

potential to result in minor but beneficial growth-related effects in and around the 

existing and proposed station areas. The proposed new stations would be located 

in communities that have endorsed the stations as components of larger downtown 

revitalization and growth plans. Given the nature of existing and proposed 

passenger rail service, such growth is more likely to be within the realm of visitorserving and tourism related uses. Existing and proposed passenger rail service 

would not have schedules suited to commuting; therefore there would be relatively 

little potential for substantial transit-oriented development. However, increased 

rail activity as a result of the reintroduction of Coast Daylight service would also 

bring about locally-desired, visitor-serving activity and growth potential in the 

existing Salinas, Paso Robles, and San Luis Obispo station areas. 

Present and Future Projects: A project would be considered growth inducing to the 

extent it facilitated new population or employment growth beyond itself. For 

example, a single residential development would result in a larger population within 

a community but would be considered growth-inducing only if it included elements 

that had the potential to further increase population or employment growth, such 

as extended transportation or service infrastructure. 

Cumulative Effects: The proposed transportation improvements are expected to 

improve operations on US 101 and existing/adjacent roadways without any 

substantial physical expansion. Other minor roadway improvements would be 

similarly focused on operational enhancements. However, it is envisioned that 

commuter rail service (Capitol Corridor) will eventually be extended to Salinas. The 

advent of such service would have the potential to increase the attractiveness of the 

Salinas area to workers in the Silicon Valley area attracted to the generally lower 

housing prices in the Salinas valley relative to those in greater San Jose. The 

environmental review for the commuter rail extension noted that the potential 

growth-related effects would be beneficial insofar as growth would likely be 

concentrated in and around the proposed station area and the commuter rail 

service would help reduce area transportation related effects. 

Taking all of the above into account, there would be no significant and adverse 

cumulative impact related to growth inducement. 
Coast Corridor

3.15 Cumulative Impacts Evaluation Draft Program EIS/EIR

3.15-30

Page Intentionally Left Blank